Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said yesterday that he does not know whether he would have recommended an invasion of Iraq if he had been told it had no stockpiles of banned weapons, even as he offered a broad defense of the Bush administration's decision to go to war.
Even without possessing chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein intended to acquire them and tried to maintain the capability of producing them in case international sanctions were lifted, Powell said in an interview. But he conceded that the administration's conviction that Hussein already had such weapons had made the case for war more urgent.
Well really this might be Colin In Denial time, because it was widely reported last summer that Powell actually was more knowledgeable than he was letting on at the UN.
Fresh evidence emerged last night that Colin Powell, the US secretary of state, was so disturbed about questionable American intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction that he assembled a secret team to review the information he was given before he made a crucial speech to the UN security council on February 5.
...
Mr Powell's team removed dozens of pages of alleged evidence about Iraq's banned weapons and ties to terrorists from a draft of his speech, US News and World Report says today. At one point, he became so angry at the lack of adequate sourcing to intelligence claims that he declared: "I'm not reading this. This is bullshit," according to the magazine.
Presented with a script for his speech, Mr Powell suspected that Washington hawks were "cherry picking", the US magazine Newsweek also reports today. Greg Theilmann, a recently retired state department intelligence analyst directly involved in assessing the Iraqi threat, says that inside the Bush administration "there is a lot of sorrow and anger at the way intelligence was misused".
I was not really aware that Auntie Donnie, Unka Dick, the Dancing Neocons and Fearless Leader actually gave a damn whether he approved or not. They just wanted a credible Liar at the UN for a day or two.
Kay "did say, with respect to stockpiles, we were wrong, terribly wrong," Powell said, flipping through the pages of Kay's transcript and quoting from selected sections. "But he also came to other conclusions that deal, I think, with intent and capability which resulted in a threat the president felt he had to respond to."
Starting a war, and invading a sovereign country over perceived threats ... now there's an American Ideal. "Intents and capabilites ... as I have said before, I intend to win the Lottery and am capable of doing it by buying a ticket but...well you see where it goes from there, right? Seems that lying stuff ought to be an Impeachable Offense, not a matter for academic editorial discussion. But I guess we'll just have to wait for the November Impeachment to occur.
Other than bad hair and no mustache, what makes Kim Jong-Il any less deserving of the tender ministrations of the 1600 Crew than Saddam? Oh, right, no Oil, a huuuuge standing army and actual Weapons of Massive Freaking Destruction. And then of course there's the rose petal shortage in Pyongyang.
posted by Jo Fish on 02.03.04 at 12:47 AM
Comments:
The unanticipated timing of Kay's devastating report on the lack of WMDs makes it critical for George W's Administration to turn over Iraq control by July 1st to accommodate his November 2004 campaign. This timetable well demonstrates why he wanted to invade Iraq in the Fall of 2002 rather than go through the UN process. With his tax cuts and humungous deficits he needs the cover of a July 1st turnover in Iraq - or an October surprise - to have a chance this November. Maybe he will decide to do the honorable LBJ thing, but I doubt it. There is no chance that he will push for a pre-November report on the "bipartisan" investigation concerning the lack of WMDs. Nor will be permit for a meaningful report of the independent 9/11 Commission. The foremost of importance for George W and his Administration is winning this November. Will the voters have meaningful information regarding these matters and the economy and the loss of jobs? His minions ask not what he can do for his country; rather, they dictate what he can do for his minions.
posted by: Shag from Brookline on 02.03.04 at 04:47 PM [permalink]
Kerry's (or whoever the Democratic nominee is) first act a president will be to pardon George Bush.
posted by: Moebetta on 02.03.04 at 09:25 PM [permalink]
shame on you all...for turning a blind eye to the world. We like to refer to your kind as: "Not in back yard Liberals"
Ask what you can do for your lobbyists?
Kerry earned the right to voice this, but is his style opening up the nam wounds in less than constructive ways? This approach will lead to a stonewalled repuke house and perhaps deliver less house seats to Dem that we are due back.
Joementum tried to grab the pendulum swing's credit and energy...maybe Clark can get this.
What is your take on Wes Clark's chances and is he legit for leadership? He was a lobby man yes, but his lobby was not a gouger. Perhaps we need someone from that side of the table to sniff out the waste in spiraling defense bills.Kerry has more lobby donors as well.
Pardon for Bush- I can see from a bonesman, and Bush will pardon Cheney, Rice, etc., al as his last act, plus any of his brothers that need it.
posted by: Mr.Murder on 02.04.04 at 07:20 AM [permalink]